Rehenes del miedo

The high point in the film comes midway in the form of Adrian Brody's childhood flashback: the camera heaves this side and that inside an amber-lit room as though floating in the air while a music box lullaby that brings back memories of Goblin's School at Night theme from Profondo Rosso chimes in the background. Other than that, the movie might as well have been called "Routine Slasher" because there's nothing that recalls the glorious days of the Italian giallo here, no wink or homage or black-gloved killer stalking distraught heroines in kitsch/chic Rome apartments, countryside villas, and medieval architecture and certainly none of the Technicolor phantasmagoria Argento and his peers conjured on celluloid 30 years ago because anyone who has followed Argento's career knows he has been working in dark muted DV canvases for the past 10 years, this absence of style flooded with wooden acting, bad English from non-English speaking actors, and a script the sum of plot contrivance happenstance and logic jumps. Some will argue these have been staples of Argento's career and I will disagree because their place has always been peripheral to a certain grand guignol aesthetic by whose outrageousness, stylistic or otherwise, not only have they been relegated to the margins but they have made perfect "sense" there in the margins as part of Argento's style (or Italian horror film-making in general). If Mother of Tears was a bold step in the direction of Phenomena's schizophrenic conclusion, this is a step backwards to the undistinguished workmanlike nature of Il Cartaio and Ti Piace Hitchcock. Everything here is generic. The score sounds like Batman Returns throwaways (Claudio Simonetti's absence is sorely felt), the villain is a curious mixture of pathetic and creepy, Argento's stylized violence is conspicuously absent. This is a serial killer movie trying to balance between crime procedural and slasher such as one may find in Lionsgate's STD catalogue. If you're looking for the giallo homage the title promises, you'll find it in Sleepless. This is a routine affair not worthy of the master's name or his fans' time and money.

When a director distances himself from a movie that is never a good sign. And after watching this movie I have to say that he is right to do so if there is truth to this claim. There was a time Dario Argento could do no wrong. So what exactly happened? Maybe we will never find out. But for now I understand very much that this isn't a movie to be proud of. There is not one scene that shows the master's brilliance. It does make me wonder what the movie could have been without the interference of the producers. It also doesn't help that the story is quite weak. There are no twists and turns. Well, maybe a very little one. None concerning the Killer. But the biggest flaw of "Giallo" is the lack of real tension and suspense. Even when the killer is known a giallo movie should provide thrills. Otherwise what would be the point of this movie. (Thinking about it, this movie can be seen as a bad parody about the giallo genre.) Adrian Brody and the beautiful women are the only things that stand out in this below average product. Avoid big time!

Many people have compared this film to 2004's Eyes of Crystal, and I have no doubt that Argento was influenced by said film, but one thing I do want to say is that Giallo has much cleaner and more precise cinematography, and that is a huge improvement over Eyes of Crystal's jerky and fast camera movement style. I know that it was popular in the 00's, and even up until only a few years ago, but it's always been a style I've hated. At any rate, this isn't exactly a great effort from late Argento. A hell of a lot better than Dracula 3D, but what isn't? Sleepless is much better than this, as is The Stendhal Syndrome and Trauma. Just about the only post-Opera film it does overtake is Phantom of the Opera, and again, what doesn't? Giallo is honestly somewhat of a disappointment, especially considering the pretty involving beginning. Visually however, it is somewhat of a treat. And for me, visuals are even more important than plot. What this IS lacking is atmosphere, pacing, and tension- in favour of gore and torture. Not a good trade off.

Dario Argento's latest "Giallo" is definitely brutal and grim, but regretfully still not a genuine throwback to the old-fashioned years of the Giallo; a sub genre of horror that Argento pretty much co-founded as well. This is one of the first times in his career that Argento didn't write the original screenplay himself, but he easily could have, since the film is chock-full of his usual trademarks, including misogynist torture, macho cop characters and a killer character with a hideous appearance and sick persona. In the city of Turin, a hood-capped killer abducts pretty young girls in his taxi and takes them to his secret liar where he has an operating table and a wide selection of delightful torture devices. When the killer was just a baby, apparently his heroine-addicted prostitute of a mother dropped him off at a nunnery in a plastic bag. I suppose that causes something irreversible damage to the fragile mind of a young boy. He also has a liver disease that makes the color of his skin kind of yellow; hence the title. When he kidnaps the gorgeous young model Celine, her older sister Linda teams up with Inspector Enzo Avolfi, who's actually a pretty introvert and reasonably creepy individual himself. The plot of "Giallo" is ultra-thin and not nearly as imaginative as they used to be, with a truckload of red herrings and more twists than a French mountain road, but there are still multiple moments of gripping suspense. The violence, however, is following the trend of the nowadays torture porn flicks (like "Hostel" and "Saw") and just comes across as repulsive, gratuitous and uncompromising. The sniveling killer pulls teeth and carves up the girls' pretty faces like he's on the set of the umpteenth unnecessary torture porn flick instead of a Dario Argento Giallo homage. The murders in Gialli movies have always been sadistic and gruesome, but at least they were often presented in style. But enough complaints now, as "Giallo" undeniably still is a worthwhile film for Dario Argento fanatics like myself and many others. I'm sick and tired of reading stuff like how the legendary Italian director Dario Argento lost his magical touch and ought to retire! As far as I'm concerned, Argento is still the only one who delivered a genuine Giallo in the post-2000's (with "Sleepless") and his other efforts like "The Third Mother", "Do you like Hitchcock" and the two episodes in Masters of Horror are fantastic entertainment.

I couldn't believe the ratings for this movie and after watching it i really think that it deserves a solid 5 or 5.5.

Biggest drawback is the yellow bad guy who is presented as a degenerated handicap who just wants to get rid of everything beautiful. The resemblance to Rambo is just obvious and it looks like a comedy from time to time. Minus 4 points for that. Revealing the identity of the bad guy too early just makes the movie take another hit as a viewer might get a little uninterested. "Yeah that's him, and yes they're going to catch him sooner or later. Why keep watching this?" Brody saves the movie from falling too deep and obviously this movie seems very professionally executed with strong visual side. It is just too bad that it falls into below average TV thriller category and there just doesn't seem to be enough plot for a full movie. In the end this movie is more of a horror movie than a giallo thriller.

Is it still worthwhile to watch it? Yes if u are not expecting a masterpiece and just some fun. Argento style is still definitely there and it's just hard to find any message that the director wants to say with this.

Still i give it a 6 because i was entertained.